ST v SW forum, or how many ways can SW trash ST?

Chas_2003 · Post by **Chas_2003** » 2003-05-26 07:04pm

Ok, just so you know, i'm not scared of any flames.

Now heres what I have to say. Everyone on this forum now seems to presume that Star Trek technology is so inferior to Star Wars technology that a single X-Wing could take out the entire Federation fleet without a scratch. Well, now its time to start the debate again (if there ever was one). You've all been brainwashed by non-canon material. No you may argue that non-canon is still Star Wars. But your wrong, its not what George Lucas' ideas, its other peoples which can contridict his and other people's ideas. Therefore, figures that tell us that one turbo laser has 100 times more enrgy than the nuclear bombs used in WWII even though we never see this in the movies, or the hulls are made out of neutornium from Neutron Stars which can protect against ALL ST weapons (even though an A-Wing crashed into the Executtor's Bridge and in ESB a single asteroid destoryed the bridge of an ISD), are ALL wrong! Even if the ICS is canon, what comes first? Onscreen canon or canon from a book with figures? If you REALLY want to argue against Star Trek, you can't just throw figures. You have to use onscreen evidence. I mean for one thing, with the powerful shields and neutronium hull which is what you say an ISD has, in an Asteroid field one lost it's bridge from a single asteroid! Yet in TOS, there was an episode were the original USS Enterprise NCC-1701 was flying through an asteroid field to save another ship. They exteneded there shields around the ship they were rescuing to protect them from the incoming asteroids! After a while some of the dilithium crystals started to burn out because of the way they were using their shields. They beamed the crew of the other vessel aboard and then let the other ship get pulvisied by the asteriods. Now if the original Enterprise can survie hits from Asteroids like this, and the ISD is supposed to be so superior, one turbolaser would destory any ship in the Star Trek universe, why did one asteroid hit the bridge section and blow it up?

Theres one argument. There are so many more but this is one example were onscreen evidence completly contridicts your figures.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-05-26 07:06pm

Read.

The.

Site?

in whatever order you fancy.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-05-26 07:07pm

course, the book is based on the movie, so. . .

Chas_2003 · Post by **Chas_2003** » 2003-05-26 07:10pm

But its still only someone elses idea of what happens by filling in the gaps. Most of it is from the movie, but in all books based on a film, the author will add some things of there own. Such as more and different dialouge. So anything that is different isn't canon.

Chas_2003 · Post by **Chas_2003** » 2003-05-26 07:12pm

Rye wrote:Read.

The.

Site?

in whatever order you fancy.

I have, thats the whole point of what I was saying earlier. Besides the site is completly byased. Its amazing how it brainwash you! Try http://www.st-v-sw.net/ and you'll see what I mean.

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2003-05-26 07:13pm

Chas_2003 wrote:Ok, just so you know, i'm not scared of any flames.

Yea that's great.

Now heres what I have to say. Everyone on this forum now seems to presume that Star Trek technology is so inferior to Star Wars technology that a single X-Wing could take out the entire Federation fleet without a scratch.

Now that's a huge exagerration. There is no fucking way one fighter can take on hundreds of ships.

Well, now its time to start the debate again (if there ever was one). You've all been brainwashed by non-canon material. No you may argue that non-canon is still Star Wars. But your wrong, its not what George Lucas' ideas, its other peoples which can contridict his and other people's ideas. Therefore, figures that tell us that one turbo laser has 100 times more enrgy than the nuclear bombs used in WWII even though we never see this in the movies,

60 Megatons calcs taken from vaporizing asteroids in ESB. Plus the now canon Episode II: Incredible Cross Sections stating the medium turbolasers are 200 gigatons on a 20 year old transport ship.

or the hulls are made out of neutornium from Neutron Stars which can protect against ALL ST weapons (even though an A-Wing crashed into the Executtor's Bridge and in ESB a single asteroid destoryed the bridge of an ISD), are ALL wrong!

Note that the A-Wing crashed into a window not the armor itself.

Even if the ICS is canon, what comes first? Onscreen canon or canon from a book with figures? If you REALLY want to argue against Star Trek, you can't just throw figures. You have to use onscreen evidence.

Not disputing that. But since ICS is not contradicted by the movies such as the 200 gigaton figure then it is admissable.

I mean for one thing, with the powerful shields and neutronium hull which is what you say an ISD has, in an Asteroid field one lost it's bridge from a single asteroid! Yet in TOS, there was an episode were the original USS Enterprise NCC-1701 was flying through an asteroid field to save another ship. They exteneded there shields around the ship they were rescuing to protect them from the incoming asteroids! After a while some of the dilithium crystals started to burn out because of the way they were using their shields. They beamed the crew of the other vessel aboard and then let the other ship get pulvisied by the asteriods.Now if the original Enterprise can survie hits from Asteroids like this, and the ISD is supposed to be so superior, one turbolaser would destory any ship in the Star Trek universe, why did one asteroid hit the bridge section and blow it up?

The shields were down during the holo-conference between that Star Destroyer's Captain and Darth Vader. With no shields and an asteroid of that size it damaged the bridge.

As for the Enterprise surviving hits, in the ESB novel the fleet of Star Destroyers were in constant bombardment of asteroids for DAYS in search of the Millenium Falcon.

Theres one argument. There are so many more but this is one example were onscreen evidence completly contridicts your figures.

It doesn't.

Cyaround,
Jason

Atavarius · Post by **Atavarius** » 2003-05-26 07:14pm

Guys, i think we have met Darkstar's colon.

Sr.mal · Post by **Sr.mal** » 2003-05-26 07:14pm

I am amazed at the new members this last week. Read the site, it even goes on about things like the ISD asteriod bridge thing.

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2003-05-26 07:15pm

Chas_2003 wrote:I have, thats the whole point of what I was saying earlier. Besides the site is completly byased. Its amazing how it brainwash you! Try http://www.st-v-sw.net/ and you'll see what I mean.

Ohhhh shit.~Jason

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-05-26 07:16pm

Chas_2003 wrote:I have, thats the whole point of what I was saying earlier. Besides the site is completly byased. Its amazing how it brainwash you! Try http://www.st-v-sw.net/ and you'll see what I mean.

AAAAAARGHHHHHH! Thump!

Kid, if MW's site is byased, then Darkstar's too. And if you're claiming it brainwashes us, I pitty you, since you don't have any grasp for scientific analisys.

Sr.mal · Post by **Sr.mal** » 2003-05-26 07:17pm

Chas_2003 wrote:
Rye wrote:Read.

The.

Site?

in whatever order you fancy.
I have, thats the whole point of what I was saying earlier. Besides the site is completly byased. Its amazing how it brainwash you! Try http://www.st-v-sw.net/ and you'll see what I mean.

Been reading too much Dorkstar. You can tell by how he argues against the ICS, hmm methinks it might be a croney.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-05-26 07:17pm

Now I know obviously after going through Darkstar site and claiming it's not biased or somehow better...that intelligence and you are not on common ground, read the five minutes of ST vs SW in the Essay section.

Okay, are we sure this isn't a sock puppet?

Chas_2003 · Post by **Chas_2003** » 2003-05-26 07:22pm

I never said it wasn't bysed! I meant BOTH are. I was mearly comparing how BOTH are as bad as each other! I just want a debate, with no beliving these figures that have been given. I want to debate onscreen evidence. If you think i'm just trying to get away from ICS and it doesn't contridict whats onscreen, then you have nothing to worry about! If ICS is just explaing what was seen onscreen, then ignoreing it wouldn't be a problem! If it is, then ICS does contirict whats onscreen then it should be ignored. Either way, theres nothing wrong with leaving it out of a debate!

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-05-26 07:26pm

I never said it wasn't bysed! I meant BOTH are.

Then don't claim one cite to be wrong based on bias. "Bias" does not automatically mean "dishonest". If you want to claim Wong's figures are wrong, point it out.

You, sir, have done the worst misrepresentation of the Star Wars side of the argument I have ever seen. You clearly have NOT read the site - which makes you quite the atrocious liar - or you would know that NOBODY claims that a single X-wing can take on the entire Federation. or that Imperial ships have all-neutronium hulls.

As for the asteroid scene... whoever said that the ISD had its shields up?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-05-26 07:26pm

Yes there is given it's status.

In other words you want to be just like Scoot and claim what is admissable in this debate and what isn't disregarding the fact that LFL allows the ICS as canon of the highest caliber only subservient to the movies.

And read the site...a great deal of the material is based upon low end calcs of Wong before the ICS, and like he said AoTC was a sledgehammer to ST.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-05-26 07:28pm

If ICS is just explaing what was seen onscreen, then ignoreing it wouldn't be a problem! If it is, then ICS does contirict whats onscreen then it should be ignored.

Fallacy of the excluded middle. Just because the ICS describes something that wasn' seen onscreen, that doesn't mean that it contradicts the movie. In order for a contradiction to occur, there must be evidence from the movie that an Acclamator can NOT fire blasts in the 200-gigaton range.

The impetus is on YOU to provide the evidence for this contradiction. As long as there is no such contradiction, the ICS stands, despite what Darkstar's delusions may say.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-05-26 07:28pm

Yet in TOS, there was an episode were the original USS Enterprise NCC-1701 was flying through an asteroid field to save another ship. They exteneded there shields around the ship they were rescuing to protect them from the incoming asteroids! After a while some of the dilithium crystals started to burn out because of the way they were using their shields. They beamed the crew of the other vessel aboard and then let the other ship get pulvisied by the asteriods. Now if the original Enterprise can survie hits from Asteroids like this, and the ISD is supposed to be so superior, one turbolaser would destory any ship in the Star Trek universe, why did one asteroid hit the bridge section and blow it up?

Oh yeah, well how long was the E-nil in the asteroid field? The ISD had been in there for at least a good portion of a day looking for the Falcon, and it'd been through a battle beforehand. And don't tell me that it's very easy to fix your ship when the whole bloody thing has had its systems shorted.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2003-05-26 07:30pm

Ghost Rider wrote:
Okay, are we sure this isn't a sock puppet?

IP's don't match. He's for real.

Chas_2003 · Post by **Chas_2003** » 2003-05-26 07:31pm

SPOOFE wrote:
I never said it wasn't bysed! I meant BOTH are.
Then don't claim one cite to be wrong based on bias. "Bias" does not automatically mean "dishonest". If you want to claim Wong's figures are wrong, point it out.

You, sir, have done the worst misrepresentation of the Star Wars side of the argument I have ever seen. You clearly have NOT read the site - which makes you quite the atrocious liar - or you would know that NOBODY claims that a single X-wing can take on the entire Federation. or that Imperial ships have all-neutronium hulls.

As for the asteroid scene... whoever said that the ISD had its shields up?

Ok, so I overexagerated, sue me. But I have seen people on this forum say things like 'one shot from a ssd would destroy a borg cube'.

Anyway, I find it unlikely that an ISD wouldn't keep its shields up in an Asteroid field! After all, one did loose it's bridge section! Don't tell me they didn't know the danger.

I never said which one was right either, but after reading BOTH I am still supporting the side of ST. Afterall, if there was no one supporting ST then there wouldn't be a debate! Surely you can respect that. After all, I would be supporting SW if there were no other SW fans.

Chas_2003 · Post by **Chas_2003** » 2003-05-26 07:34pm

Darth Yoshi wrote:Oh yeah, well how long was the E-nil in the asteroid field? The ISD had been in there for at least a good portion of a day looking for the Falcon, and it'd been through a battle beforehand. And don't tell me that it's very easy to fix your ship when the whole bloody thing has had its systems shorted.

But the ISD lost it's bridge section after one hit. If the shields were failing then it wouldn't go from no damage to the bridge section to being wiped off!

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-05-26 07:46pm

Chas_2003 wrote:
Darth Yoshi wrote:Oh yeah, well how long was the E-nil in the asteroid field? The ISD had been in there for at least a good portion of a day looking for the Falcon, and it'd been through a battle beforehand. And don't tell me that it's very easy to fix your ship when the whole bloody thing has had its systems shorted.
But the ISD lost it's bridge section after one hit. If the shields were failing then it wouldn't go from no damage to the bridge section to being wiped off!

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=21193

about the bridge loss.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-05-26 07:47pm

How do you know that the command superstructure was lost? They never showed the ISD without its tower.

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2003-05-26 07:50pm

Chas_2003 wrote:Ok, so I overexagerated, sue me. But I have seen people on this forum say things like 'one shot from a ssd would destroy a borg cube'.

Um because it's true.

Anyway, I find it unlikely that an ISD wouldn't keep its shields up in an Asteroid field! After all, one did loose it's bridge section! Don't tell me they didn't know the danger.

Oh please, Lord Vader wanted a holo-conference. He didn't give a damn when Piette said it was dangerous to go in the asteroid field and he didn't give a damn if the ships were vulnverable with no shields for the holoconference.

I never said which one was right either, but after reading BOTH I am still supporting the side of ST. Afterall, if there was no one supporting ST then there wouldn't be a debate! Surely you can respect that. After all, I would be supporting SW if there were no other SW fans.

Now that's stupid.
I am a Star Trek and a Star Wars fan and practically everyone on this board are.
Just because we realize ST can be beaten means jack nothing to what we feel about ST.

Cyaround,
Jason

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2003-05-26 08:04pm

Well i've finally seen what was so wrong with darkstar and i conclude that the asshats strategy was as follows
1) Start with the premise that you'll be fair
2) Show some evidence
3) Keep making wilder and wilder and less and less supported arguments slowly building them slowly enough as to avoid letting the average idiot that surfs the net not realise what's going on
4) Eventually try and convince people that wars stands a snowballs chance in hell

Rightous Fist Of Heaven · Post by **Rightous Fist Of Heaven** » 2003-05-26 08:05pm

Heeeyy its Chas from the Bridge Commander forums.

Ok, so I overexagerated, sue me. But I have seen people on this forum say things like 'one shot from a ssd would destroy a borg cube'.

Naah, we get laughs from your so-called "arguments".
Yup, one shot would indeed destroy a cube. Truth will set you free.

Anyway, I find it unlikely that an ISD wouldn't keep its shields up in an Asteroid field! After all, one did loose it's bridge section! Don't tell me they didn't know the danger.

What you find unlikely is utterly irrelevant. What canon evidence tells us is the only thing that is relevant.
Ofcourse they knew the danger. Knowing how Vader treated the officers that had "displeased" him, the captains werent too fond to be strangled
to death.

I never said which one was right either, but after reading BOTH I am still supporting the side of ST. Afterall, if there was no one supporting ST then there wouldn't be a debate! Surely you can respect that. After all, I would be supporting SW if there were no other SW fans.

Tough ST vs. SW debates have quite diminished during the past year because of AOTC and AOTC:ICS. Sure supporting ST is not a bad thing
but if supporting it means that you blindly claim it will win in some situation even if that was against the facts, its not smart.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

ST v SW forum, or how many ways can SW trash ST?

ST v SW forum, or how many ways can SW trash ST?

Re: ST v SW forum, or how many ways can SW trash ST?